timerr

Thanks for all the replies everyone. I had to go out and buy it and I still don't have a SACD player yet. On the wish list. Sounds very good in 2 channel. One thing I did notice is at the intro (heartbeat), the soundstage seems louder than the older version I have on CD. Anyone else notice this or are my RF3's playing tricks on my ears again?.....

I haven't been around for a bit. Just wondered if anyone that's listened to this would care to give a report. Good mix? Over the top? Anyone...

Due to size limitations of my room, my RF 3IIs are about 7 feet apart, and toed in slightly. My "sweet spot" is about 8 feet out and for some reason seems to be a little right of center between the speakers. Hope someone can shine some insight on why that is. As in while sitting on the couch, it seems like I'm sitting closer to the right speaker than the left in order to have my vocal or "centered" instrument sound "blended" and not "one sided" Just by moving my head only a few inches to the left makes the left speaker take over the center blend. Any tips on making the "sweet spot" cover a wider range or am I stuck because of room size?

Know this isn't the Yamaha board, but just wondered if any of you out there in your travels have ever heard or may have used this sub before. I know Yamaha isn't known for it's speakers. I was told that they did their homework on this one. It does seem to be designed very well. The 10" cone (250 watts and supposedly goes down to 20htz) fires out the bottom onto a quad plate instead of just onto the floor like most bottom firinlg subs. Thoughts...

I know I'm late on this one, but I saw it for the first time a few days ago. WOW!!!! This is the most dynamic DVD I've seen so far. Bar none! I had to turn the sound DOWN more on this movie than any other movie I've watched on my system. The most dynamic use of the surrounds from start to end. The "larger than room" feeling of sounds like when they are in the mines is just one example. Any one else find they had to cut the volume on this one to keep from being blown off the couch?

Many people here give credit to Klipsch for that "real or live" sound that they deliver. And I think they should be praised. But the recordings themselves have more to do with it IMHO. Some recordings just flat out sound better than others. I think this has a lot to do with things like how it was mixed and miced in the studio, and much to do with who mastered it (polished it up) 2 examples 1. Eric Clapton "Pilgram" A fantastic recording to say the least. In the credits it was mastered by Bob Ludwig who has worked with the best in the world over the years bar none. But to me the recording sounds "too polished" the vocals sound "larger than life" 2. Shawn Mullins "Soul's Core" To me this one was nailed from the start in the studio. Vocals are crisp, clear, and sound like there could be a mic and a singer standing right in front of you. Same with the instruments. It just sounds more "real and natural" Klipsch-like End of my ramblings, you may roast me now... And by the way, I blame a lot of my critical listening on many of you here. My therapist says that with a few more sessions I'll be able to just listen to music for fun again.

I know I'm still a rookie here, but am I missing something here? I have the RF 3IIs also and a Yamaha with a 90 fixed for the LFE. My question is why did you spend all that money for the 3s if you are going to cut them off at 90 by setting them to small. Even if they are rolling off at around say, 50, you are still choping off the bottom end you spent all that money for. Why wouldn't you set your sub to come on in the 50 range and below?

I know this isn't tube or tweeter talk here again, but I just wanted to hear comments, good or bad on this CD or any other Van recording you like. I just put this one on again the other day and had forgot how good it sounded. There are a lot of guests on it too. John Lee Hooker on a couple, and Candy Dulfer plays alto sax on several tracks. G.L.O.R.I.AAAAAAAAAAA. thoughts...

Thanks Mobile, This thread began as a way to find out if the LP better captured the realness of the studio, and I want to get back into LPs...... snooping around ebay and lurking... Thanks. PS just saw the "sony" in the fine print on the CD itself, do you think I can sue for refund?... It'll have to do for now.

Jazzman, I haven't read the comments from Mr. Davis, but would be interested if you can tell me where to find it. This new thread on this subject was mainly to defend the remaster by COLUMBIA. Some of the posts somehow had it confused with an apparent SONY butcher job. (like some other people here have posted, DON'T get me started on anything SONY has ever made!) Thanks.

Wow! The difference of opinions is looming large on this one. I have no idea how many versions of this recording are out there, but the 20 bit remaster I have is NOT by Sony. It's by Columbia. On the back of the CD case there are a few paragraphs about how legendary the LP is. I'm not going to retype the whole thing but it mentions an additional performance of "Flamenco Sketches" It also mentions about earlier remasters sounding thin and piping to the ears. THIS reissue was remixed on an all tube three-track machine, (that's greek to me but maybe some of the tubies might get that one) an old Presto much like the one use for the original recordings. Now the instruments sound rich and full, like real instruments. It goes on to say that if you happen to be a musician, you may have already noticed a problem when you try to play along with earlier versions. Three tunes were in the wrong key, which means that the original album and ALL subsequent reissues (except for the recent gold Mastersound edition, which lacks the alternate "Flamenco Sketches")were recorded at the wrong speed- making all the pitches slightly sharper than in real life. just another 2 cents from the rookie here, ok maybe 5...

Thanks for all the great info and input on this recording. Seems like Mr. Davis made a soothing connection to a lot of us. When I listen to it... it relaxes me like a glass of smooth wine.

Miles Davis... his horn soothing out of a Klipsch horn loaded tweeter... I guess that could be a match made in heaven.... Anyway, need some help here, I have this on what's called "THE DEFINITIVE VERSION!" on CD. Says it's newly mixed and 20 bit remastered. Like everyone here says, Klipsch speakers greatly bring out the limitations of a recording. My question is, do any of you that have the really good turntables still in your systems, and have a good copy of this on LP hear as much hiss and background noise as the CD version. I know I'm fueling the fire hear for Digital/ Analog with this. Just looking for some more experienced imput. Thanks.

Someone told me the other day that if you have to move your bass and or treble knobs off of 0, then you didn't spend enough on speakers. Just wondered what you all thought about that? Seems to go along with the thinking of not adding or taking away from the natural studio sound. In general, where do you keep yours set, do you adjust for different music? Comments...

My vote goes to "Alice In Chains" "Unplugged". Those of you that have heard this one, even if you aren't a fan of their music have to be impressed by this one. The sound stage is almost 0. The engineers nailed everything! The imaging is fantistic. Deep, real bass on "NO excuses" and "Rooster" Vocals are not larger than life, just realistic. Anyone want to share their pick?